Dungeon Classics #37: Coffy

Posted on by Jeppe Kleijngeld

FilmDungeon’s Chief Editor JK sorts through the Dungeon’s DVD-collection to look for old cult favorites….

Coffy (1973, USA)

Director: Jack Hill
Cast: Pam Grier, Booker Bradshaw, Robert DoQui
Running Time: 90 mins.

‘Coffy is the color of your skin’, sings Denise Bridgewater in the opening theme of Coffy – a blaxploitation classic starring Pam Grier and one of Quentin Tarantino’s all-time favorite films. From the moment the stylish opening credits roll, it’s clear this movie is something special. Grier plays Flower Child ‘Coffy’ Coffin, a nurse whose sister’s life is shattered by heroin addiction. Fueled by rage, she sets out on a ruthless mission of revenge. Disguising herself as a drug-addicted prostitute, she lures street-level pushers into a trap – before blowing their brains out. But she doesn’t stop there. Determined to take down the real power players, she goes after the slick pimp and drug dealer King George, as well as the dangerous mob boss Vitroni. Directed by Jack Hill – an early collaborator of Roger Corman and Francis Ford Coppola before cementing his legacy as the king of blaxploitation – Coffy delivers everything the genre is known for: gritty action, bloody vigilante justice, and plenty of nudity, not least from Grier herself. While her acting faced some criticism at the time, her sheer star power is undeniable. She owns this film, elevating it beyond mere exploitation and securing its place in movie history as an absolute cult classic.

Why the Ukraine War Might End Soon

Posted on by Jeppe Kleijngeld

On February 24, 2022, the Russian army invaded Ukraine. Many, including myself and Russian President Vladimir Putin, initially believed it would be a short operation. Putin expected to topple the Ukrainian government within three days and install a puppet regime, turning Ukraine into a vassal state. However, events unfolded quite differently.

Rather than surrendering and giving up their sovereignty, Ukraine sought Western support, receiving weapons that allowed them to fiercely resist the Russian invasion. To avoid appearing weak, Putin escalated the conflict into a full-scale war, which has now dragged on for three years. During this time, Russia has managed to occupy around 20 percent of Ukrainian territory, but progress has been painstakingly slow and has come at an enormous cost in human lives, financial resources, and military equipment.

Russia’s relentless ‘meat grinder’ tactics are unsustainable. The country is running out of funds to continue the war while its economy struggles with soaring inflation and high interest rates. This puts Putin in a precarious position. If the West maintains pressure and Ukraine continues to receive support, Putin may eventually be forced to withdraw – a move that would leave him vulnerable to backlash from Russian elites, the public, and key power groups.

So far, Putin has consistently framed the military operation in Ukraine as a necessary measure to protect Russian speakers and to achieve the ‘demilitarization and denazification’ of Ukraine. He claims that Ukraine has been under the control of neo-Nazis and Western influences, posing a direct threat to Russia’s security. But if he pulls out of Ukraine without achieving these objectives, how will he justify it?

Trump may have just provided him with a convenient narrative. According to expert Konstantin Samoilov, Putin could use the Trump administration’s pro-Russian stance to declare victory. Samoilov suggests that Putin might announce this on May 9 – Victory Day in Moscow.

“In my eyes, Putin has won”, Samoilov stated in a recent episode of Silicon Curtain. “For three years, he has been telling Russians: ‘We are not fighting Ukraine; we are fighting the collective West, led by the USA, which is using Ukraine as a proxy.’ Now he has an event in the White House where Zelensky was basically kicked out. Additionally, the U.S. suspended military aid to Ukraine, and Ukrainian forces withdrew from Kursk. That, to Putin, is a victory. On May 9, he might say: ‘Dear Russians, we have fought the USA – and we have won.’”

While an end to the war might seem like a relief for Ukraine and the West, Samoilov warns that Russia’s withdrawal could signal something even more sinister. “Putin will end the special military operation in its current form, only to replace it with something far worse. He will shift the Russian economy and society into full-scale war mode. He will say: ‘This war is over, but the threat remains – and now it is even bigger because it is Europe.’ The Kremlin will manufacture reasons to convince Russians that the real enemy is closer than ever, and the state will take complete control of the economy.”

I find Samoilov’s arguments compelling. The Russian military simply does not have the strength to continue pushing forward, especially if Europe remains committed to supplying Ukraine with resources – which I believe they will. As Silicon Curtain host Jonathan Fink points out, there are already signs that the Kremlin is preparing for this shift. Russian propaganda is framing recent U.S. actions as evidence that the Kremlin’s narratives were correct all along, reinforcing the image of Russia as the victor. Last week, Putin made Trump wait an hour before speaking to him in the ‘negotiations’ call to show the people that he was the big alpha male and Trump is basically his bitch.

Once again, we – the West – should not underestimate Putin as we did in the past. If he indeed ends the Ukraine war, we must assume that he will be back in full force. We are very far from a permanent peace with Russia, and arguably this can only be achieved if Russia is defeated. An inconvenient truth if ever there was one.

Putin’s Psychological Warfare Has Finally Paid Of – Big Time

Posted on by Jeppe Kleijngeld

Vladimir Putin is having his best moment in three years. For much of the war, he appeared weak, unable to achieve what many believed would be a swift victory.

Consider the sheer size of Russia compared to Ukraine. And yet, after enormous human and financial costs, Putin has only managed to occupy about 20 percent of Ukrainian territory. Russia has suffered staggering losses – by some estimates 870,000 troops, alongside vast amounts of money and military equipment. His economy is in turmoil. In theory, the combined economic and military power of the U.S. and Europe could decisively tip the balance in Ukraine’s favor.

But geopolitical reality has taken a grim turn. 71 million voters made a catastrophic choice – electing a sociopathic criminal and convicted rapist to the presidency of the United States.

A lot has been written about the psychology behind this tragedy. What kind of country would elect this lying and grifting rapist not once, but twice? The answer lies in a potent mix of resentment, misinformation, and ideological extremism. Many Americans have allowed their hatred of liberals and minorities to blind them to the existential threat that a second Trump presidency poses. These voters display a troubling blend of egocentrism, racism, ignorance, delusion, and extremism.

Yet, we must not underestimate the role of a certain European dictator in this tragedy. For over a decade, Vladimir Putin has been waging psychological warfare against the West through social media and disinformation campaigns. His goal has always been to weaken Western democracies from within. And he has succeeded. Every major democracy is now plagued by far-right extremism. Societies are fractured, consumed by internal conflicts, and increasingly oblivious to the existential threats looming over them.

America is the first of Western democracies that is now in serious danger of collapsing. Trump has now – two months in power – begun defying court orders. Well at least one of them when a judge ordered his regime to return a plane containing alleged Venezuelan gang members. This marks a serious escalation. In the United States, the power is divided between three equal branches of government; the executive branch, the congress and the courts. Trump has already cowed the Republican-controlled Congress into submission. Now, he is setting his sights on undermining the courts. The question is: how far is he willing to go? I would say that with his completely deranged mental state at this moment, and all the terrible decisions he has made, eventually all the way. America is in deep, deep trouble.

The upside of all of this mayhem is that Europe is forced to get its act together – and help Ukraine to win the war. This is entirely possible because, as I wrote before, Putin is running out of money. However, intelligence provided by the US is still needed, so if Trump decides to stop sharing intel, Ukraine has to fight this war with blinders on. This is problematic and not something that is easily solved.

One immediate step Europe could take is utilizing frozen Russian assets under the Magnitsky Act to fund Ukraine’s war effort. To avoid destabilizing financial markets, this should be limited to assets proven to be acquired through corruption.

Putin is playing poker very well, but his cards – of which Trump keeps saying they’re so good – are really not that great. Unless of course, Trump really is a Russian asset for which quite a lot of evidence exists.

His latest remarks only reinforce this suspicion. This week, Trump suggested that the U.S. should take control of Ukraine’s nuclear power plants, claiming that this would deter Russian attacks.

This idea is absurd on multiple levels. First, Russia is unlikely to target these plants due to the immense radioactive risk to its own territory. Second, if the U.S. controlled Ukraine’s energy infrastructure, it could hold Ukraine hostage by shutting off power and making political demands. Most disturbingly, as defense expert Jake Broe pointed out, this move would prevent Ukraine from developing nuclear weapons – a prospect that has gained traction since NATO membership is no longer an option. Preventing Ukraine from acquiring nuclear deterrence is precisely what Putin wants. Once again, Trump appears to be acting completely in Russia’s interests rather than America’s and Europe’s. Let that sink in.

These are some of the most perilous times in modern history. This is our World War II moment, and we are only at the beginning. Yet, history provides hope: authoritarian regimes often fail. Let’s hope this collapse happens before irreparable damage is done. And if there’s one lesson we must take away from this, it is that unregulated social media has been an unmitigated disaster for the West and an extremely powerful weapon for the autocrats. It must be reined in to ensure that another Trump-style catastrophe never happens again.

Double Bill #13: Double Impact & Hard Target

Posted on by Jeppe Kleijngeld

The eighties and nineties, the decades in which I grew up in, was the era of the action movie. And one of its main heroes was Jean-Claude Van Damme (real name: Jean-Claude Van Varenberg). For this Double Bill, I rewatched two of his most enjoyable and nostalgic movies of this period: Double Impact (1991) and Hard Target (1993). In the first one he plays a set of twin brothers, so it has double the Van Damage. The brothers go after a bunch of gangsters in Hong Kong who murdered their parents when they were babies. It has great bad guys, who are stylishly dispatched by the two Van Damme characters using both martial arts and a variety of firearms. The greatest threat is the triad member played by Bolo Yeung, a legendary Chinese martial arts expert who is also in Enter the Dragon and Van Damme’s Bloodsport. The final duel with him is one of the highlights of the movie. The film’s director Sheldon Lettich also directed Wrong Bet in 1990, another Van Damme classic. He is no John Woo, but skillful enough to give the audience what it wants: violent, bloody action and some humor on the side. Hard Target has plenty of this as well, but the choreography of the action scenes is of a whole different level. Van Damme takes on a gang of despicable white men, led by Lance Henriksen, who organize manhunts for the rich and bored. Van Damme’s character Chance grew up in the New Orleans Bayou and knows a thing or two about survival and asskicking. When he becomes the quarry of their next hunt, the roles are quickly reversed and we get to witness some of the most satisfying kills of Van Damme’s career. Hong Kong director John Woo’s American debut was produced by Robert Tappert and Sam Raimi (of Evil Dead fame). It is easy to see why they liked this project: Woo’s visual style is so immensely cool it matches Raimi’s. His action is an art form, a ballet of blood, bullets, explosions, falling bodies and flying kicks in slow motion. These are two classics of the era and highly enjoyable as a Double Bill.